Most cancers caused by natural mutations

[twilyth]

That seems to be the message of a new and very controversial study.

https://www.sciencenews.org/article/random-mutations-play-large-role-cancer-study-finds

The gist of the article is that there is a strong correlation between tissues and organs that have a high rate of cell division and cancer. They estimate that about 2/3 of all cancers result from normal mutations that accumulate during the division of stem cells. That leaves about 1/3 that result from environmental and other factors.

But many scientists contest this new study especially since it seems to negate public safety and education efforts. But as the article concludes.

In fact, Tomasetti and Vogelstein stress that their findings are compatible with cancer-prevention recommendations. Avoiding smoking, tanning beds, obesity and other known carcinogens can prevent the “environmental” mutations that combine with inherited and random mutations to tip cells into cancer. Without those final straws loaded from environmental exposures, tumors may be averted or greatly delayed.

emphasis added.

 

[alucasa]

I sort of agree. I say "sort of" because I have nothing concrete to back my theory up.

To me, cancer is like certain groups of cells calling quits and decide to become something else and therefore going against the norm.

Old age triggers this most often. Some form of mutation is harmless (like thick hairs appearing where they shouldn't be).

 

[natr0n]

I though everyone knew this. You cant cure something that's unpredictable by nature.

 

[mcraygsx]

I though everyone knew this. You cant cure something that's unpredictable by nature.

Given enough time and research it is possible to cure. I am pretty sure they said same thing "You cant cure something that's unpredictable by nature." about plenty of illnesses 100 years ago.

 

[Easy Rhino]

well this makes sense to me. if environmental factors were higher then everybody would seem to have cancer which just isn't true.

 

[RejZoR]

It makes sense that if you have many divisions of cells, there will be errors that later manifest in form of cancer or tumors. The fact we've extended our average life expectency from roughly 30 years to what, 75-ish means that as we go past our "ancient" life expectancy, more and more errors happen. And we are getting good at treating those as well now...

 

[the54thvoid]

http://scienceblog.cancerresearchuk...the-hype-10-persistent-cancer-myths-debunked/

Number one, the biggest risk is age. It's always been known that cancer just happens. It's just modern media reporting that obfuscates that not through malice but ignorance.
However, those environmental factors play significant roles in increasing the prevalence of cancer. Imagine the decreased cost of medical expenses and increase in life if people took more responsibility.
If the environmental factors are only a third, that's still a huge positive to work on.